The judge has also been criticised for referring to a defendant and his
co-accused as "pathetic drug addicts".

In one heated exchange during the criminal trial Judge Dean called the
defence lawyer's questions "stupid" three times, before simply calling him
"stupid".

Judge Dean: "[Defence counsel], you are unbelievable.
Unbelievable. I will use my description that I used yesterday. You are stupid. I
ruled"

Mr Lindner: "I've got my role. You've got your role."

County Court judge Mark Dean, pictured while working as a lawyer in 2009. Photo:
Justin McManus

Judge Dean later told Mr Lindner: "I cannot believe what has happened in this
trial, some of the decisions that have been made by the defence. It is beyond
me, absolutely beyond me.

"In 35 years as a criminal lawyer, 10 years as a silk, I have never seen such
incompetence by introducing evidence in a trial which is evidence of the accused
man's guilt. And I, for the life of me, have no idea what his defence is."

The judge's comments came to greater notice after the Victorian Court of
Appeal delivered a verdict on an appeal in the case on Monday, which
contained large sections of extraordinary and heated transcript between Judge
Dean and Mr Lindner.

The Court of Appeal decision described the judge's behaviour as "needlessly
argumentative and rude".

"No matter what view a judge has of the manner in which counsel is running
the case, to insult and demean counsel, even in the absence of the jury, is not
only likely to offend and embarrass counsel but also to risk impeding counsel in
conducting the trial and thus risk giving rise to a miscarriage of justice," the
Court of Appeal judges
said in their finding.

Michael Calvert Cook was convicted of two counts of armed robbery after using
a gun to hold up two gaming venues in Mentone in 2012. Cook was sentenced
in March 2015. His co-accused, Katherine Nanopoulos pleaded guilty and was
sentenced in June 2013.

Cook appealed his conviction in March specifically on the behaviour of the
judge, with Cook claiming the judge "interjected on too many occasions,
descended to the arena and donned the mantle of [the] prosecution", and was
biased against him.

​His argument centred around a key turning point in the trial.

Nanopoulos had burnt some clothes two or three days after the armed robbery
he was charged with- a piece of evidence the prosecution could use to argue to
the jury she was trying to conceal evidence of a crime.

Judge Dean ruled this was inadmissable evidence, meaning the prosecution
could not present it to the jury, weakening its case.

However defence counsel decided to cross examine Nanopoulos about the
evidence, meaning it would become admissible and the prosecution would be able
to lead it to the jury. That led to an extraordinary exchange between the judge
and the defence counsel, where Judge Dean questioned Mr Lindner's running of the
case.

Judge Dean: "What do you propose to ask her?"

Mr Lindner: "Whether she said anything about burning clothes
in her statement of 30 April."

Judge Dean: "So you want to open up all the evidence that
I've ruled is inadmissible."

Mr Lindner: "No, no. This goes to her credit."

Judge Dean: "[Defence counsel], you are unbelievable.
Unbelievable. I will use my description that I used yesterday. You are stupid. I
ruled"

Mr Lindner: "I've got my role. You've got your role."

Judge Dean: "Yes. But my role — no. But, [defence counsel],
you are sailing very close to your ethical responsibilities to this court. You
have a primary responsibility to behave in an appropriate manner and to ensure
that this process and proceeding is conducted according to law."

Mr Lindner: "Absolutely."

Later Judge Dean told Mr Lindner: "I am getting very close to reporting you.
Your behaviour in this trial is completely unacceptable. This case has been
going for 11 days."

Mr Lindner: "Yes."

Judge Dean: "It is an embarrassment. Your conduct of this
trial, and the ridiculous submissions you make, and points that have no
substance, are a serious breach of your duties to this court."

At another point the judge observed the defence counsel had "a very
unfortunate habit of asking a whole lot of unnecessary questions" and called one
of his questions to a witness "incredibly stupid".

This was in response to counsel's questioning of Nanopoulos about whether she
had enjoyed jail.

During the trial the judge worried aloud whether the accused would be able to
get a fair trial. "I have become exasperated with [defence counsel's]
incompetence, and I don't think Mr Cook is getting a fair trial because of
that".

Judge Dean played a very active role in the trial, repeatedly interrupting
prosecution and defence evidence to ask his own questions. The appeal judges
noted he appeared to grow frustrated with the way both the defence and the
prosecution were conducting their cases.

"It is not clear why the judge interrupted the cross-examination to ask the
direct question about Alex Cook," the appeals judges note.

At another point the appeal judges noted "the trial judge's interventions
were unnecessary and risked undermining the course of cross examination".

The appeal judges also found it was unnecessary for the Judge Dean to
repeatedly describe Cook and Nanopoulos as "pathetic", and at one occasion call
them "pathetic drug addicts". However they found this did not affect the trial,
as the comments were not made in the presence of the jury.

While the appeal judges were critical of some of Judge Dean's conduct during
the trial, they found the appeal should be dismissed and the conviction upheld,
because the judge's actions did not cause a miscarriage of justice.

Before Judge Dean was appointed to the bench he had a
long career as a criminal defence lawyer, which included defending North
Melbourne Football Club player Jimmy Krakouer on interstate drug trafficking
charges

Neither Judge Dean nor Mr Lindner would comment on the story when contacted
by Fairfax Media.